LXII BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLUGY 



Primordial] ^• form is discovered by the sense of toncli; but, 

 with the development of vision, form is interpreteil from sym- 

 bols of color expressed in hue and tint. The form learned by 

 vision is the form which is first learned by touch, l)ut subse- 

 quently interpreted by vision, which assumes, throuoh the 

 agency of expeinence, that certain arrangements of light imply 

 that the object must have certain adjustment of figure. The 

 light reflected from the object impinges upon the eye and 

 becomes a mark or symbol of the figure as primaril}' learned 

 by touch ; not that the particular object seen is first touched, 

 but that the elements of form which it presents were first dis- 

 covered by touch. Thus vision becomes a vicarious sense 

 for touch. Vision is deft, performing not only its fundamental 

 function in the discernment of color, but instantaneously and 

 skillfully it performes all the offices of touch in the discovery 

 of form. 



Here we ha^-e abundant evidence of the derivative nature 

 of the decorative pleasures. By a course of experience, that 

 which in infancy is unattractive, in maturer years becomes 

 pleasurable; but more, that which is beautiful in childhood 

 may become ugly in age. If the appeal is made to individual 

 experience, all will testify to the derivative or evolutional 

 nature of pleasures and pains. The history of decoration is 

 loaded with lessons. That which is beautiful in savagei'y 

 is unattractive or positively ugly in modern culture, while 

 that which is unattractive among the lower races of man- 

 kind mav often appear as exquisitely lieautiful in higher cul- 

 ture. What we especially wish to note is that decorative 

 pleasures and })ains become intuitive by hereditary transmis- 

 sion, and these intuitive pleasures and pains may be trans- 

 formed in the indi\-idual and the race. Our judgments of 

 pleasure and ])ain depend on the ])oint of A^ew from which 

 pi'operties are contemplated. There is nothing in form itself 

 to make it beautiful or ugly, but the form becomes beautiful 

 or ugh' through the agency of experience, by which certain 

 forms are found to be desirable or undesirable as the case may 

 be. A constant cognition of such forms will produce ;i habit 

 of forming judgments of beauty about them which ultimately 



